CoA reckons that State officials should be appointed by High Court
The CoA suggested that administrators appointed by the High Court should precede over state cricket associations until elections are held for the same. The Committee ensured that Amicus Curiae Gopal Subramaniam presented this to the High Court along with all other submissions in the draft.
The Committee of Administrators (CoA) stated that the administrators should be appointed through the concerned High Court in state cricket associations, where the office-bearers have completed their tenure of three years or nine years. Following the hearings before the Apex court on May 1 and May 11, the Supreme Court-appointed Committee has notified the state associations of “certain developments including but not limited to” the previous hearings.
“Where the term/tenure of the current office bearers of a State Association is over and/or elections are due, the concerned Hon’ble High Court may be approached either by the said State Association itself and/or any member thereof for appointment of an administrator to administer the affairs of the said State Association pending elections,” the CoA said in its mail to the state associations, reported ToI.
The Committee has advised this to be one of the main submissions made by the Amicus Curiae, Gopal Subramaniam, in addition to his other submissions before the court. The submissions are expected to be deliberated by the court on July 5 and until new elections are conducted, an administrator appointed by the High Court will precede over the State Associations.
“It is noteworthy that the said submissions contemplate a direction by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that the affairs of each of the State Associations be administered by an administrator to appointed by the concerned Hon’ble High Court till the time fresh, free, fair and untainted elections are conducted”.
Many state associations require a fresh election. For instance, Sourav Ganguly has completed his three years at the Cricket Association of Bengal (CAB). The Lodha Committee recommendation, which came into place on July 18, 2016 with the approval of the Supreme Court, had stated that a three-year cooling-off period should follow after every three-year term in office with a maximum of three such terms. However, the apex court directive submitted a fresh set of objectives to the BCCI draft along with the objection of the cooling-off clause.
The Supreme Court in its May 1 order, gave instructions to the state associations not to hold elections till the draft BCCI constitution was finalised. The state associations had to keep up with the cricket board’s constitution when the changes were made. The CoA, though, has now suggested that administrators should be appointed by the High Court to run the state bodies until the elections can be held.
“It would not be appropriate for any State Association (including any State Association that has or may hereafter be declared compliant for the purpose of receiving funds from BCCI in terms of the orders dated 7th October 2016 and 21st October 2016 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court) to conduct elections until the New BCCI Constitution is finalized/approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and an administrator is appointed by the concerned Hon’ble High Court to administer the affairs of the said State Association pending elections,” the CoA mentioned.
Earlier, the CoA had expressed the view that state associations that have only the representatives of the clubs or district units as voting members, can grant memberships to former international cricketers without voting rights. However, the CoA has now said all ex-internationals have to be incorporated into their respective associations as voting members.
“It is mandatory for all State Associations (including those which have only representatives of district associations or clubs as voting members in the General Body) to grant membership with voting rights to former international players (men and women) hailing from the State,” the CoA mail said, adding that this should be done “prior to conduct of elections such that they shall be entitled to vote in the said elections”. The Committee has spoken about receiving “several representations/complaints” from ex-international cricketers from various states, stressing that ‘membership without voting rights is akin to no membership at all.
Comments
Leave a comment0 Comments